I am still hoping that someone at a school site will comment on their experience; positive or negative, in regard to the “Inquiry Teams” that are part of the strategic plan and according to the plan have already been implemented at all schools starting last year.

Jim Mordecai

I had a chance to briefly look over the district’s strategic plan. I think in theory alot of the ideas are very sound, but the district needs to be careful about implementing some of them. Stand out examples include making schools “safe”, “engaging” parents and “creating systems” of some sort or another to improve performance. My son’s High School’s idea of making the school “safe” means a locked campus with a very visible security and police presence. I took my son out after feeling imprisoned myself with every school visit (complete with the requisite interrogation from the security staff about why I was on the campus) and couldn’t imagine how he would be thriving educationally under those conditions. The “engagement” of parents was to let us know how the students’ “unstable” home lives were a negative impact on learning and how the school needed “parent partners”. Sounds good on the face of it but came off very judgemental, as if all parents were somehow neglectful. We all know how effective “systems” can be when there is no human element involved to inject common sense and compassion. I think some things that could be helpful for the district would be to include crosscultural training for teachers, staff, administrators and students, explore alternative discipline models to the exclusionary ones in current use (suspensions and explusions that remove students from the learning evironment altogether), employing teacher “coaches” to coach teachers who are not as effective (in a non-punitive manner) and include a community building curricula in their efforts.

We’ve all been guilty of working in our own silos, doing good work for Oakland youth through health, counseling, tutoring, enrichment, arts and music, etc. without coordinating our efforts.

OUSD must become an effective hub for partners, opening its doors and coordinating true and deep partnerships among diverse organizations. I haven’t seen this happening yet, but continue to advocate that this is what OUSD partners need in order to truly engage with the work of the strategic plan.

A response and addressing the situation is better for everybody. Any temptation to ignore or sweep it under the rug is not.

It would not be wise for any ReXO to say anything in public about QEIA losses.

And, I believe last year was the first year of the Strategic Plan’s use of school site “Inquiry Teams” and Mia was no longer the Principal at Cleveland. Cleveland has never been a low performing school eligible for the QEIA grant. Finally, as a beginning ReXO Mia Settles might have learned about the schools she was responsible for supervising and ongoing failure to meet QEIA targets. But, as a newbie challenging what school site principals were doing in implementing the QEIA grant targets was likely beyond her pay grade.

In addition to self-censorship on QEIA losses any public comments on Strategic Plan Inquiry Teams that wasn’t positive would also be unwise on the part of any ReXO that isn’t ready for retirement. And, a Superintendent isn’t running a democracy or debating society and should get rid of his ReXOs that are not onboard with his program. While some superintendents are open to criticism moving a program means that criticisms are kept in-house.

Jim Mordecai

Mia Settles, one of the ReXOs did amazing work at Cleveland Elementary School when she was the principal. It is a Title 1 school that has many of the same programs – garden science, music beginning in kindergarden, two libraries – one focusing on k-2 and the other 2-5 (yes, an overlap) and many other projects. She believed with working with and incorporating parents in planning and using grants to fund outside what OUSD had to offer. She had buy-in from all or nearly all of the teachers who each sat of committees at the school.

There are many talented people within OUSD who know how to work within the school system, work with private grants, work with federal grants (QEIA), work with families, work with teachers and other union personnel, work with non-union personnel, work with the neighborhood around the school and work with and for the children they serve to educate.

Of all of the administrators in OUSD, I feel as though Ms. Settles understands the complexity of a school district. It would be interesting to hear what she has to say about the Master Plan and the QEIA losses.

TOP THREE DISTRICTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GRANT WERE SAN LEANDRO 1/1; SAN JOSE USD 4/4; MT. DIABLO 6/7

BOTTOM THREE OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE GRANT WERE REDWOOD CITY 2/2; PAJAREO VALLEY 6/7; OAKLAND 14/19.

So what that the highest paid administrator is in the bottom three districts in administration of QEIA funding?

What does it matter that good administration of the QEIA funding provides experienced teachers and lower class size for the lowest performing schools?

Who cares? Oakland has after all has a terrific Strategic Plan!

My last statement is a bit too much as good planning is necessary in serving students but so is good administration of funding . It is the taxpayers paying the bill for the plans whether the money is attracted by a Strategic Plan or the promise to keep class size lowered as in the QEIA grant.

And, I believe the Oakland School Board as well as taxpayers should care about Superintendent Tony Smith Administration being accountable for its poor record in administration of the QEIA grant monies.

While it is inappropriate for School Board Members to discuss Superintendent Tony Smith’s record on administration of the QEIA grant, the public should expect its School Board officials to question and understand what went wrong so that only 5 QEIA school remain serving Oakland’s underperforming schools after this school year.

Jim Mordecai

Jim Mordecai

@OUSD Parents who read this blog – do you realize how incompetent your average OUSD administrator is? Do you realize how much of our money they are wasting? Oakland’s Teachers are the lowest paid in Alameda Co. These millions of dollars of waste could go a long way toward fixing crumbling infrastructure, books, field trips and Teacher salary. In my opinion, if Oakland salaries were closer to the surrounding districts, we would attract and retain, more Teachers.

Certain regulars on this blog, frequently, regurgitate how difficult it some cases it is to release an ineffective Teacher. But what about all the dead weight at the Harper building?

@Katy – now that we are going “back to the future”, small schools – can you track what happens to all the six figure administrators? Will they morph into consultants? What’s the plan?

This money was from a seven year grant that was provided to 19 schools. The idea of the grant was that lowering class size and having a staff that had the same amount of experienced teachers as the District average would be factors in providing conditions for students at low performing schools to better perform.

However, because the District administration took the grant money but didn’t provide the conditions it agreed to in accepting the money and keeping class size down, after three years students at 14 of the 19 schools no longer will get the benefit of the grant money and the learning conditions of lower class size and experienced teachers.

Jim Mordecai